9mm Carbine for defense?

Pistol caliber carbines really seem to draw a lot of flack when it comes to discussions about defensive arms. Especially those chambered in the 9x19mm Parabellum cartridge. Critics are often quick to denounce these guns as nothing more than range toys with no real capabilities as a self defense option. I don't have much of a dog in this fight but I've been looking into picking up a Beretta CX4 Storm in 9mm for quite some time now. I have a rather small arsenal at this time, so something with multipurpose capabilities is really needed for me. I plan to use the CX4 Storm as mostly a range/plinking gun, but I'm wondering if it could also pull double duty as a home defense or SHTF gun.

So I decided to make this poll just to get the general consensus on using pistol caliber carbines for defense, especially those chambered in 9mm. What are your thoughts on this? This should be an informative thread. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm Carbine for defense?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!

capcyclone

August 25, 2013, 03:21 PM

I voted "yes".

To clarify, I don't rely on a 9mm carbine as my first home defense option, but I'd be comfortable using one for such a purpose.

I've shot a 9mm carbine (Ruger PC9) many times on the range - and really enjoy it.

USAF_Vet

August 25, 2013, 03:58 PM

I've had, and will have again, 9mm carbines. My carry guns are 9mm, and entrust the round to end a threat if necessary. I would expect similar capability of the round from a carbine.

But, if I'm going to a long gun for defense, it wouldn't be my first choice. I'd much rather have an AR or 12 gauge in my hands.

grimjaw

August 25, 2013, 04:13 PM

Voted "no" because I live (and have lived, mostly) in an apartment where penetration concerns are a greater concern. I don't doubt the gun would stop an intruder. What I worry about is the intruder (and the wall, the door, etc) not stopping the bullet. The potential for collateral damage is too great, in my particular case.

Ramone

August 25, 2013, 04:16 PM

I often recommend a 9MM Carbine as a defensive weapon, for a number of reasons:

Affordable ammo, normally widely available.

easy to use, even in the hands of those with minimal training (my grandfather held that the reason for the M1 carbine was that shavetail officers would be less likely to shoot themselves in the foot, or their troops, with it).

Enough 'stopping power' plus better accuracy than a pistol, especially in the hands of a neophyte.

Also, while it's debatable, I believe that in a struggle, it is easier to retain, and easier to control the muzzle of a long gun than a pistol.

some states/municipalities restrict handgun ownership while a 9MM carbine is legal in such areas.

Loc n Load

August 25, 2013, 04:23 PM

I use a Rock river 9mm AR as my "house gun"....I have three decades of LEO experience with the Colt 9mm sub gun, so the RRA 9mm carbine is a natural for me.....and as noted in previous posts, it has minimal muzzle flash, less muzzle blast than a shotgun in an enclosed space, and I have plenty of JHP's on tap if I need them.....have a surefire 6p tac light and green laser mounted on it also....works for me.

JShirley

August 25, 2013, 04:31 PM

While a 9mm carbine is less of a liability for HD than a 9mm handgun, most 9mm carbines are available in 5.56x45mm, for only a few ounces more weight, and the exact same length.

I said yes, my HiPoint 9mm carbine is just dandy. But my HP .40 carbine would be grabbed before the 9. Moot point though, since I have an M1 carbine built for this.

adelbridge

August 25, 2013, 06:58 PM

A rifle barrel is going to give you close to 20% more energy vs. 4" pistol barrel.

C0untZer0

August 25, 2013, 07:09 PM

I'd rather have a 12gauge shotgun loaded with #1 Buck, but a 9mm carbine will do just fine.

Dean1818

August 25, 2013, 07:23 PM

Not my first choice, but it would do

Djay

August 25, 2013, 07:23 PM

The now discontinued Ruger Police 9mm carbine came to mind when I saw this thread. Also came in .40 caliber. Built like tanks but gosh awful factory triggers.

Warp

August 25, 2013, 08:01 PM

Provided it was proven reliable, I would be comfortable with it.

But it wouldn't be my first choice. Or my second. (for me)

gotigers

August 25, 2013, 09:03 PM

yes. I have been thinking of adding a 9mm carbine to my collection. Beretta Storm, Just Right Carbine or an AR. I like ARs, but 9mm ARs are much more expensive than the other two.

horsemen61

August 25, 2013, 09:21 PM

I voted yes because I think this is a good choice for someone who is not a gun person. :D

Zach S

August 25, 2013, 09:59 PM

The "9mm Carbines are range toys" crowd always baffled me. Its its suitable for defense out of a handgun, I fail to see why its not suitable out of a carbine.

There are better options, but a PCC for defense is fine.

JShirley

August 25, 2013, 11:58 PM

It's not that they're useless: it's that, for the same price, and (usually) same size firearm, you can have a real rifle with 3x the power.

John

Justin

August 26, 2013, 12:15 AM

You know, I used to be in the camp that PCCs weren't really useful for anything, but have recently changed my mind on the subject.

I think a PCC would make for a handy home defense gun, especially for people who don't shoot very often.

Compared to a handgun, a PCC is going to be a lot easier to shoot quickly and accurately under pressure. Compared to a shotgun, it's going to have much higher capacity and much less felt recoil and you don't have to worry about manually operating a pump (assuming a pump-action shotgun). Reloads are also going to be much simpler.

Compared to an AR or other .223 carbine, it may be a tossup, though the PCC will be cheaper to operate due to the lower cost of ammunition. It will also have less muzzle blast, and is arguably quieter, though I don't know if the difference in dB levels would be noticeable in the confines of a home.

Depending on ammunition, the PCC will be at a disadvantage, as pistol rounds tend to penetrate housing materials more than rifle rounds.

bannockburn

August 26, 2013, 06:14 AM

As others have stated, not my first choice for a HD gun but I wouldn't have a problem using a 9mm. carbine if the need arises.

briansmithwins

August 26, 2013, 06:48 AM

If I'm going to lug around a rifle size package I want rifle ballistics when I pull the trigger.

That said, I'd take my Uzi before I'd pick up any of my pistols. It's very much easier to get hits with quickly with it.

BSW

Deer_Freak

August 26, 2013, 09:41 AM

My wife has a Hi Point carbine she really loves. The carbine hits a lot harder than a pistol. Moreover, the Beretta is not any better made than the Hi Point. Plastic is plastic I don't care who makes it. Plus the Hi Point actually has the sights mounted in metal. The Hi Point is not picky about what you feed it. Magazines are easy to get. The only thing wrong with the Hi Point is Beretta owners have to run it down to justify spending $850 on a piece of plastic.

303tom

August 26, 2013, 09:42 AM

NO, only if I had too...................

Schutzen

August 26, 2013, 09:57 AM

I would be very comfortable with a 9MM carbine for SD in an urban or in some sub-urban environments. If your engagement ranges are limited to 100-150 yards, a 9MM carbine is very effective. Houses in most subdivisions limit your range to considerably less than 150 yards.

You also have to understand that the law limits your engagement of targets to "active threats". He may be a bad guy, but if he is 200 yards out with a pistol, you can not engage him unless he is threatening someone else. Self defense is not combat.

JShirley

August 26, 2013, 10:24 AM

I don't think anyone in this thread is mentioning range as a disadvantage for a PCC. As Justin mentioned, .223 penetrates less in/through structure than handgun rounds at close range.

briansmithwins

August 26, 2013, 10:26 AM

You also have to understand that the law limits your engagement of targets to "active threats". He may be a bad guy, but if he is 200 yards out with a pistol, you can not engage him unless he is threatening someone else. Self defense is not combat.

Somebody with a pistol 200 yards away shooting at me is a active threat. The fact the he's chosen a relatively ineffective weapon doesn't mean he can't get lucky or I can't be unlucky.

BSW

Warp

August 26, 2013, 12:30 PM

My wife has a Hi Point carbine she really loves. The carbine hits a lot harder than a pistol. Moreover, the Beretta is not any better made than the Hi Point. Plastic is plastic I don't care who makes it. Plus the Hi Point actually has the sights mounted in metal. The Hi Point is not picky about what you feed it. Magazines are easy to get. The only thing wrong with the Hi Point is Beretta owners have to run it down to justify spending $850 on a piece of plastic.

Plastic is plastic.

Wood is wood.

Metal is metal.

I don't see hwo you can believe some but not all of those ^

Besides, there's plenty of metal that is pretty important to the function involved in making those carbines

I would be very comfortable with a 9MM carbine for SD in an urban or in some sub-urban environments. If your engagement ranges are limited to 100-150 yards, a 9MM carbine is very effective. Houses in most subdivisions limit your range to considerably less than 150 yards.

You also have to understand that the law limits your engagement of targets to "active threats". He may be a bad guy, but if he is 200 yards out with a pistol, you can not engage him unless he is threatening someone else. Self defense is not combat.

There are tons of advantages that have nothing to do with effective range.

And a person shooting at me from 200 yards with with a pistol is absolutely an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death.

RX-178

August 26, 2013, 01:02 PM

There's also the logical blunder in the (I assume unintended) implication that bad guys 200yds away would only have a pistol.

BSA1

August 26, 2013, 01:05 PM

Yes...

BUT...

ONLY if it uses the same hi-cap magazines as my semi-auto handgun.

However I come to view a .223 AR or AK as a better choice for several reasons the least not being price as I can buy a S&W Sport cheaper than the Berretta and next to impossible to find Kel-Tec's.

yzguy87

August 26, 2013, 01:12 PM

I don't personally own own one but I wouldnt hesitatate to use one. I've shot my buddy's Hi Point 9mm carbine and I liked it.

I use a 9mm pistol for my house gun.

2zulu1

August 26, 2013, 02:10 PM

Pistol caliber carbines really seem to draw a lot of flack when it comes to discussions about defensive arms. Especially those chambered in the 9x19mm Parabellum cartridge. Critics are often quick to denounce these guns as nothing more than range toys with no real capabilities as a self defense option. I don't have much of a dog in this fight but I've been looking into picking up a Beretta CX4 Storm in 9mm for quite some time now. I have a rather small arsenal at this time, so something with multipurpose capabilities is really needed for me. I plan to use the CX4 Storm as mostly a range/plinking gun, but I'm wondering if it could also pull double duty as a home defense or SHTF gun.

So I decided to make this poll just to get the general consensus on using pistol caliber carbines for defense, especially those chambered in 9mm. What are your thoughts on this? This should be an informative thread. :)
I voted no based upon JHP bullet performance at increased carbine velocities. JHP bullets are designed to expand/adequately penetrate w/i velocity window parameters. Increase the surface area of the hollow cavity and the bullet will perform at slower velocities, short barrel ammunition. Reduce the hollow cavity surface area and JHPs will expand at faster velocities, think .357SIG/.357mag.

Using Gold Dots as an example, their 124gr/147gr offerings are basically deep cavity designs. This 147gr Gold Dot was tested @1155fps;

The 1289fps appears to be at the lower end of the 125gr velocity window, I've taken this bullet to ~1438fps in .38 Super and it's good for ~16" penetration, much better than the ~7" penetration of the over expanded 124gr Gold Dot.

I have a CX-4 Storm in .40 and bullet performance is lacking because of their deep cavity design.

There are simply better carbine choices for home defense than pistol calibers, especially so given that one uses a pistol to get to a shot gun or rifle caliber.

Rule3

August 26, 2013, 02:38 PM

Yes, Why not? 30 rounds of +P 9mm HP. I like shooting my RR. Sure you can have bigger and badder calibers but are they need at 10-20 feet?

But for in the home I still prefer a handgun. JMO

gunownerz

August 26, 2013, 05:21 PM

9mm is great for defense but you would have to be on the look out for a traveling bullets going through walls. It would certainly cease the capability of an intruder exiting the house easily. However, if you're not concerned about the collateral damage a 9mm weapon would cause then it is an excellent choice for home defense. Otherwise, I would maybe gear towards a little bit lower caliber.

JShirley

August 26, 2013, 06:31 PM

"lower caliber"? Are you speaking about smaller diameter or less power than a 9x19?

John

mac66

August 26, 2013, 06:53 PM

I voted yes but I do believe that if you are going to carry a rifle for protection it should be in rifle caliber. If you carry a pistol for protection it should be in a pistol calibers. Pistol calibers are better in rifles than in pistols but why handicap yourself with pistol caliber in a rifle? I do have a couple PCCs and wouldn't hesitate using them for defense if that's all I had. But I don't so I won't

Warp

August 26, 2013, 07:00 PM

I voted yes but I do believe that if you are going to carry a rifle for protection it should be in rifle caliber. If you carry a pistol for protection it should be in a pistol calibers. Pistol calibers are better in rifles than in pistols but why handicap yourself with pistol caliber in a rifle? I do have a couple PCCs and wouldn't hesitate using them for defense if that's all I had. But I don't so I won't

I choose a carbine in 5.56 first. Second choice would be a 12 gauge. Third choice would be a pistol caliber carbine.

But for other people...maybe my wife for example...the pistol caliber carbine might be the best choice.

JShirley

August 26, 2013, 07:23 PM

PCCs, being blowback, have as much perceived recoil as 5.56. I remember being surprised by the recoil when I first fired my SUB-9 at a carbine class. The instructors also commented, after firing, that they were surprised it had that much felt recoil.

Now, 5.56 has very little recoil, anyway, so unless you're talking about one of the rare gas-operated PCCs, it's probably better to just leave recoil out of the consideration.

John

tuj

August 26, 2013, 07:42 PM

I thought about this one a lot. I looked very hard at the CX4 carbine and the Hi-point and kel-tec's offerings all in 9mm. I also considered an AR in .223.

In the end, my primary choice of defensive weapon was the 9mm pistol. Its powerful enough with defensive ammo, and not so harsh that my smaller and recoil-sensitive wife can handle it adequately. The pistol also has the advantage of being more compact for moving through doorways and such that I might have to do to round up my family. It can also be fired very accurately 1-handed (I am a bullseye shooter).

We also have a .223 AR at the ready if I need to go mobile and want more firepower and less over-penetration potential.

Between the pistols and the AR's we have, I couldn't justify the 9mm carbine. That said, I voted yes because I think it is a valid defense platform, provided you load it with the right ammo and it can reliably digest it.

Dr.Rob

August 26, 2013, 07:53 PM

I'm pretty happy with a 9mm pistol for defense, so I think I'd be happy with a 'rifle' version.

Yes there are better choices, but the question was 'would I be comfortable?'

justice06rr

August 26, 2013, 08:32 PM

If it was my only choice, then yes I would take a PCC for SD purpose.

Given other choices including a rifle caliber long gun or 12g shotgun, I would choose those first before a PCC.

My general rule is keep rifle calibers in rifles, and pistol calibers in pistols (personal preference only). IMO a Glock19/17 with a 30rd mag is just as effective and more portable than a PCC in the same caliber and capacity.

barnbwt

August 26, 2013, 09:38 PM

PCCs, being blowback, have as much perceived recoil as 5.56

This is why I advocate that we need more guns like the 30 Carbine, which operate from a locked breech. With a fixed breech, the rest of the gun can be scaled down along with the cartridge, to the point you have a handgun. I personally do not know why no pistol caliber recoil-operated guns based on handgun chassis are offered, since a longer-barreled PX4 pistol with a stock would be well under 5 pounds, be much smaller than an AR or similar, have a round more suited to the task at hand, be independent of gas-op peculiarities, and cost no more to make than a handgun (less materials). Scaled-down gas-op guns like the M1 Carbine have many benefits, but cost as much to make as a full-size rifle version, and it's much easier to sell the bigger gun if the cost is the same ;).

I think a long-barreled/stocked Steyr TMP would be a fantastic defensive carbine.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WOPuhZiH5EU/Tyx4oZ_RmdI/AAAAAAAAA1Y/n8ALRWB3kmo/s1600/Brugger_and_Thomet_MP9_open.jpg
Dial down the sight, replace the can with a foregrip tube, add a sturdier and more comfortable stock, and you'll have what I'm going for (I'd want it in 7.62x25, but whatever :rolleyes:). The rotating barrel lockup will be more amenable to a barrel length increase than a tilting Browning design.

To the "AR is bettur" guys, know this; pistol-caliber subguns ruled the roost for over fifty years (1930's to the 1980's) during which the AR and 223 were both present for a good portion. That's about as long as bolt-rifles were popular with militaries, and we have no questions about their effectiveness. AR carbines have been super popular for around half that time, and among civvies for what, five years or so? I wouldn't reject 70+ years of solid, reliable performance for the new kid on the block just yet ;)

And can your AR do this?
http://gunfreezone.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ppsh41.jpg

"My general rule is keep rifle calibers in rifles, and pistol calibers in pistols"
Who decides what is a "rifle caliber" or a "pistol caliber" and what does 30 Carbine count as? 500 S&W? What about 45 Win Mag, 357, 10mm, 7.62x25, 5.7x28? Where is the line drawn, and why? Neither revolvers nor bolo pistols need the rounds to fit in a hand grip, after all ;)

If not for our dumb SBR laws, not a single railed pistol would go without a foregrip and stock unless it was used for daily concealed carry. There's a reason pistol ranges are usually about a quarter as long as rifle ranges, and it's not because the guns are less accurate ;). Control, retention, stability, and control (again).

TCB

montanaoffroader

August 26, 2013, 10:22 PM

Yes I would be "comfortable" using a PCC for home defense. Not my first choice, but it's a whole lot better than a kitchen knife or a golf club.

The real question here is whether or not YOU are comfortable with it. As long as you are OK with it and it has enough power to do the job, nothing else really matters.

stressed

August 26, 2013, 10:37 PM

Remember a carbine wil accelerate standard 9mm to +P velocities from their longer barrels, and accuracy skyrockets. Running a light solid copper or bonded HP (115gr) or even some of the lighter loads, like .380 bullets - over penetration will not be too much of a problem ,as all that energy will be dumped on target and probably not exit. The added weight and size will make recoil miniscule for quick follow up shots, as fast as you can pull the trigger.

Cooldill

August 27, 2013, 02:52 AM

That's a good idea Stressed. I myself would really like to see some ammo manufacturers come out with 9mm (and other caliber) loads specifically designed for carbines, with more appropriate powders and perhaps more robust hollow points that would give the best performance from 16"+ barrels- you know, for those that can't or don't reload.

briansmithwins

August 27, 2013, 07:08 AM

I personally do not know why no pistol caliber recoil-operated guns based on handgun chassis are offered, since a longer-barreled PX4 pistol with a stock would be well under 5 pounds, be much smaller than an AR or similar, have a round more suited to the task at hand, be independent of gas-op peculiarities, and cost no more to make than a handgun (less materials).

Recoil operation would add complexity that's not needed when you have the larger subgun sized frame to work with. Blowback is simple to manufacture, works, and is cheap.

For example, the MP5 (delayed blowback) isn't that much lighter than an Uzi (blowback) and is much more complex internally. The advantage the MP5 had for cops was the closed bolt, which made firing single rounds quickly accurately (typical cop training was to shoot single rounds, not FA) easier than the Uzi's open bolt.

BSW

fpgt72

August 27, 2013, 08:05 AM

It's not that they're useless: it's that, for the same price, and (usually) same size firearm, you can have a real rifle with 3x the power.

John
And we all know that you need 3x the power inside the house....and you really need it if you live in an apartment.

Tools for the JOB and this the OP stated for home def.

The biggest worry is where that bullet is going to go if you miss, and most folks that have never been shot at before, or are in a life or death instance are just a little jumpy and have a good chance to miss. Second is where is that going to go after it goes in one side and out the other of Mr. Bad Guy.

I always say you main focus in such an instance is to stop Mr. Bad Guy not kill him.

Warp

August 27, 2013, 09:42 AM

And we all know that you need 3x the power inside the house....and you really need it if you live in an apartment.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

Can you explain?

We all know that handgun cartridges lack the threat stopping efficacy of a rifle cartridge or a shotgun, and we all know (even if we didn't learn it until reading this thread) that a properly selected projectile from a 5.56/.223 carbine penetrates FEWER interior walls than a typical handgun cartridge (while maintaining that added threat stopping ability)...and surely we all know that being inside the house doesn't mean that the lethal threat is necessarily any less of a lethal threat than it would be somewhere else...

So I'm not sure what you are going for here.

The biggest worry is where that bullet is going to go if you miss, and most folks that have never been shot at before, or are in a life or death instance are just a little jumpy and have a good chance to miss. Second is where is that going to go after it goes in one side and out the other of Mr. Bad Guy.

I always say you main focus in such an instance is to stop Mr. Bad Guy not kill him.

I see the issue now.

You are confused about the terminal ballistics of a carbine in 5.56/.223.

I suggest looking up what happens when 5.56/.223 enters Mr. Bad Guy.

As well as looking up what happens when 5.56/.223 hits a wall, vs when a handgun round hits a wall.

Walkalong

August 27, 2013, 09:55 AM

Dr. RobYes there are better choices, but the question was 'would I be comfortable?'Exactly, and why I voted yes. All (Most) of the reasons put forth about better choices are true, but I can assure you no one wants me shooting at them with an AR15 in 9MM, whether the bullets over expand or under expand. Yep, my 870 with buckshot would be more affective in the house, but I would be comfortable with a 9MM carbine, and that was the question after all.

gunownerz

August 27, 2013, 10:12 AM

"lower caliber"? Are you speaking about smaller diameter or less power than a 9x19?

Yeah, my fingers were moving faster than my head. :)

C0untZer0

August 27, 2013, 10:37 AM

The 9mm is a pretty versatile round. I think with all things you have to look at the load that you are using.

You could load your carbine with things like Cor-Bon, and you've got something close to a rifle bullet - a 90gr .355 projectile @ 1750 fps.

If you have a round that is nearing jacket separation in media @ 990 fps, there is a pretty good chance it will separate if fired from a carbine. But there are such things as bonded bullets.

One of the things about the 147gr Speer Gold Dot is that it does hold together at 1175 fps - because the Underwood +P+ doesn't disintegrate in tests.

So I think a standard pressure 147gr Gold Dot would do fine as a HD round through a 16" barrel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMiI8VcPQ3c

I'm also wondering if shooting the Underwood 147gr +P+ through a carbine barrel bumps up the velocity to the point that the bullet does disintegrate. I'd love to see someone test it.

dprice3844444

August 27, 2013, 12:29 PM

http://www.mechtechsys.com/ uses glock pistol lowers and 1911

here is a conversion that you can use that uses glock pistol lowers and mags. if funds are tight,mags are interchangeable.barrel can be threaded for a suppressor or design a barrel over.easy for ladies and children to use because of low recoil.

JShirley

August 27, 2013, 06:44 PM

And we all know that you need 3x the power inside the house....and you really need it if you live in an apartment.

Tools for the JOB and this the OP stated for home def.

The biggest worry is where that bullet is going to go if you miss, and most folks that have never been shot at before, or are in a life or death instance are just a little jumpy and have a good chance to miss. Second is where is that going to go after it goes in one side and out the other of Mr. Bad Guy

I hate having to go this basic, but I keep encountering purported firearm owners who have no clue how terminal ballistics actually work. In general, heavy bullets penetrate MORE. In general, lightweight bullets penetrate LESS. With me so far?

With expanding rounds, in general, slower rounds expand less on hitting the target. The exact same round, with virtually all designs (a few copper designs and the EFMJ being known exceptions), fired at higher velocity, will expand more rapidly when it hits the target. With greater frontal area, sooner, the IDENTICAL bullet fired faster will penetrate less. Still with me?

Okay, so far, I have explained that light bullets penetrate less than heavy ones, and that fast expanding bullets penetrate less than slow expanding bullets. Put them together: a very fast, lightweight bullet will penetrate much less than a heavy, slow bullet.

I'd hate to insult anyone's intelligence, but since I've just had to explain a common phenomenon because (evidently) lots of people don't understand it, I might as well explain another.

Handgun bullets, compared to rifle bullets, are heavy and fired at slow velocities. Even the relatively light (in terms of handgun bullets) 9mm Parabellum/9x19mm fires most typically a 115 or 124 grain bullet at between 1100 and 1300 fps. A 5.56x45/.223 typically fires a 55-68 grain bullet at between 2700 and 3100 fps.

So, light/fast vs heavy/slow. Even if you didn't bother to take into effect the much greater potential for a .223 to quickly stop a deadly threat, there would still be very good reasons to use a carbine for defense, when limited penetration is desired.

John

stressed

August 27, 2013, 06:49 PM

The 9mm is a pretty versatile round. I think with all things you have to look at the load that you are using.

You could load your carbine with things like Cor-Bon, and you've got something close to a rifle bullet - a 90gr .355 projectile @ 1750 fps.

If you have a round that is nearing jacket separation in media @ 990 fps, there is a pretty good chance it will separate if fired from a carbine. But there are such things as bonded bullets.

One of the things about the 147gr Speer Gold Dot is that it does hold together at 1175 fps - because the Underwood +P+ doesn't disintegrate in tests.

So I think a standard pressure 147gr Gold Dot would do fine as a HD round through a 16" barrel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMiI8VcPQ3c

I'm also wondering if shooting the Underwood 147gr +P+ through a carbine barrel bumps up the velocity to the point that the bullet does disintegrate. I'd love to see someone test it.
So do you think, the +P+ 147 grain underwood will shed it's jacked from a 16" carbine? add about 200 FPS more then their longest pistol barrel advertises.

a truncated cone FMJ at a "+P+" loading from a carbine will over penetrate, and that an be guaranteed. (BB offers a 124grain +P+ meplat that is even advertised as the PENETRATOR - and fired from a carbine will accelerate it even more allowing all powder to burn)

A standard 5.56mm will be 62 grains, pushed at well over 2000fps. I just recently picked up some +P 50 grain SCHP "liberty" ammunition that was on closeout for cheap - it's advertised at 2000fps from a pistol. So in effect, it should be at 2200fps or faster from a 16" barrel. That's like a mini rifle in it's own right.

Warp

August 27, 2013, 06:52 PM

So do you think, the +P+ 147 grain underwood will shed it's jacked from a 16" carbine? add about 200 FPS more then their longest pistol barrel advertises.

a truncated cone FMJ at a "+P+" loading from a carbine will over penetrate, and that an be guaranteed. (BB offers a 124grain +P+ meplat that is even advertised as the PENETRATOR - and fired from a carbine will accelerate it even more allowing all powder to burn)

A standard 5.56mm will be 62 grains, pushed at well over 2000fps. I just recently picked up some +P 50 grain SCHP "liberty" ammunition that was on closeout for cheap - it's advertised at 2000fps from a pistol. So in effect, it should be at 2200fps or faster from a 16" barrel. That's like a mini rifle in it's own right.

I guess that 3,000 fps is well over 2,000 fps...but stating it the way you did doesn't seem very accurate when it's muzzle velocity (XM855 type 5.56 out of a rifle length barrel) is indeed approximately 3,000 FPS.

And of course 3,000 fps is a hell of a lot faster than 2,000 fps.

For reference, 7.62x39 pushes 124gr bullets around 2,400 FPS.

And neither 5.56 nor 7.62x39 are particularly stout rifle cartridges.

So I don't know how rifle like 50gr at 2,000-2,200 (theoretical/marketing/advertised) will actually be.

barnbwt

August 27, 2013, 07:11 PM

Is the line about 5.56 penetrating barriers less true for defense rounds intended for deer/man sized mammals, or only for varmint rounds? I know either will do enough of a number to work, but that's true for "inadequate" pistol rounds as well. Just want to compare apples and apples here.

"Recoil operation would add complexity that's not needed when you have the larger subgun sized frame to work with. Blowback is simple to manufacture, works, and is cheap."

It's also heavy, big (as you said), and high-recoiling for its power level. Especially in closed bolt configuration. Obviously direct blowback does not deliver what most consumers desire, or they'd be more popular. Delay helps alleviate some of the weight/recoil issue a bit, but at considerable expense, and does not shrink the package much. The concept excels mostly in full auto/burst applications, which are shut to the American consumer.

If recoil operation is considered suitable/acceptable for handguns, which everyone feels comfortable shelling out for, I fail to understand why it wouldn't be equally practical for a long arm for the same reasons (provided the longer barrel does not impede function). The same goes for the rounds fired by those pistols, as well. It wouldn't cost 150$ like a Hi-point, but it would only be 100$ or so more than a cheap locked breech Glock or PX4. Basically the same price as a low-end AR, but narrower, shorter, lighter, and shooting a lower powered round that won't blow out windows/sheetrock in close proximity when fired :D

TCB

Warp

August 27, 2013, 07:21 PM

Is the line about 5.56 penetrating barriers less true for defense rounds intended for deer/man sized mammals, or only for varmint rounds?

What are you talking about/referring to?

The word "barrier" hadn't been used a single time in this thread until your post

barnbwt

August 27, 2013, 11:19 PM

Como se dice, "Walls," "Sheetrock," "Masonry" ? Is "Barrier", no?

I'm not talking armor plating --of course not. I'm talking about the assertions (which I believe to a certain extent) that 223 generally penetrates less than pistol rounds. My question is whether that is true for soft point defense rounds designed to expand in a controlled manner through animals the size of humans, or if that is only the case for more fragile varmint bullets like V-Max that tend to fragment and perform "poorly" (from an idealized terminal ballistics performance perspective) in masses larger or tougher than the varmints they were designed for. Otherwise we're really just comparing lead-core rounds with frangibles and declaring the latter penetrates less (duh).

Does a "standard duty load" hollow/soft point 9mm penetrate more or less than a "standard duty load" hollow/soft point 223 through common domicile materials? The 223 penetrates more than the 15" or whatever the 9mm does in gelatin, right? Will it also penetrate building materials more assertively? I was under the impression that bullets designed for rifle speeds/pressures are sturdier than bullets designed to expand at the meager velocities attained from handguns ;). Faster + Lighter = less penetration if the compared bullets are constructed and deform similarly.

A tungsten rod of equal weight thrown faster will most certainly penetrate further than a soft pure-lead ball ;)

TCB

JShirley

August 28, 2013, 06:19 AM

You'd have to start with the right assumptions. Yours are way off.

No, most .223 of any type doesn't penetrate more than 15" of gel. No, most .223 bullets could not be described as "sturdy", while almost all defensive .355 bullets could be.

Since no-one's talking about tungsten, let's leave that out.

The "penetrating tip" M855 ammo should penetrate about as much in gelatin as most defensive 9x19mm loads. Almost all .223 will penetrate less than this. Varmint loads tend to under-penetrate for defensive use, unless you're being attacked by a groundhog.

With a subject this well documented, and where the information is readily available, I think it's only reasonable to expect members to explore known, demonstrable fact before expressing their opinion

John

briansmithwins

August 28, 2013, 07:41 AM

It's also heavy, big (as you said), and high-recoiling for its power level. Especially in closed bolt configuration. Obviously direct blowback does not deliver what most consumers desire, or they'd be more popular. Delay helps alleviate some of the weight/recoil issue a bit, but at considerable expense, and does not shrink the package much. The concept excels mostly in full auto/burst applications, which are shut to the American consumer.

I think you're misreading the real factors. Short recoil works great with pistols because nobody (except HiPoint owners) wants a 3lb .45 ACP or 9mmP pistol. SR gets you a smaller and lighter pistol.

With PCCs, most people don't mind the extra weight and bulk from the firearm being blowback operated. You're already carrying around something with a buttstock and 16" barrel. Another pound of steel isn't that much of additional burden.

I'm not sure where the idea that PCCs have heavy recoil comes from. Quite a few of the people who've shot my Uzi remarked on how low the recoil is.

BSW

fpgt72

August 28, 2013, 07:46 AM

You'd have to start with the right assumptions. Yours are way off.

No, most .223 of any type doesn't penetrate more than 15" of gel. No, most .223 bullets could not be described as "sturdy", while almost all defensive .355 bullets could be.

Since no-one's talking about tungsten, let's leave that out.

The "penetrating tip" M855 ammo should penetrate about as much in gelatin as most defensive 9x19mm loads. Almost all .223 will penetrate less than this. Varmint loads tend to under-penetrate for defensive use, unless you're being attacked by a groundhog.

With a subject this well documented, and where the information is readily available, I think it's only reasonable to expect members to explore known, demonstrable fact before expressing their opinion

John
Know your facts, but I know of just one real life experience that changed my mind...and all it takes is one. First you have to understand we are not only talking sheetrock, but hollow core doors (very thin) as well as glass.

The neighbor, and yes it really was a neighbor. Had one of those gun cleaning accidents. AR (a real 1990's vintage colt BTW) went off, went through his kids door, took the top round ball off his kids crib, (split the wood) and went out the window to god knows where. He sold me the rifle. He is what I would call a good guy he just got careless, and all it take is one careless moment. That proved to me that any....ANY bullet has a chance to go where you might not want it to go. Now I know that is the last thought in your head if Mr. Bad Guy is in your house. And in my experience (10yrs at a sheriffs office) most Mr. Bad Guys want to do their bad things when people are not at home....it is much more simple to take your stuff if you are not there.

I guess the bottom line is before I get too word-y IF that bullet does leave your house YOU are responsible for where it ends up....and if it ends up in the wrong place you will go to jail....and you might go to prison.

Just think about it....

Warp

August 28, 2013, 08:47 AM

Know your facts, but I know of just one real life experience that changed my mind...and all it takes is one. First you have to understand we are not only talking sheetrock, but hollow core doors (very thin) as well as glass.

The neighbor, and yes it really was a neighbor. Had one of those gun cleaning accidents. AR (a real 1990's vintage colt BTW) went off, went through his kids door, took the top round ball off his kids crib, (split the wood) and went out the window to god knows where. He sold me the rifle. He is what I would call a good guy he just got careless, and all it take is one careless moment. That proved to me that any....ANY bullet has a chance to go where you might not want it to go. Now I know that is the last thought in your head if Mr. Bad Guy is in your house. And in my experience (10yrs at a sheriffs office) most Mr. Bad Guys want to do their bad things when people are not at home....it is much more simple to take your stuff if you are not there.

I guess the bottom line is before I get too word-y IF that bullet does leave your house YOU are responsible for where it ends up....and if it ends up in the wrong place you will go to jail....and you might go to prison.

Just think about it....

I'm not sure what your point is or why you are saying this.

Nobody ever said, or implied, that a firearm/ammunition combination that can be relied upon to stop an attacker would be stopped be a hollow core interior door and/or a window.

JShirley

August 28, 2013, 09:21 AM

Exactly. And, if we are trying to minimize risk to bystanders/innocents in the vicinity, a .223 loaded with expanding rounds is the best way to do this.

fpgt72

August 28, 2013, 09:45 AM

Exactly. And, if we are trying to minimize risk to bystanders/innocents in the vicinity, a .223 loaded with expanding rounds is the best way to do this.
I do not agree....but it is a decision that each person that makes the choice to have a firearm in the home has to make.

My point is you don't need large powerful weapons to stop 90% of what happens when the bad guy enters your home. So many internet experts think you need high powered rifles, large pistols, whatever. The real truth is the best for home defense is a shot gun bottom line. If you have a gun...any gun 99% of the people trying to do bad things are going to run. And .9% are going to really re-think things if they are shot....that .1% that is high or is just there to kill you are not going to be in the same state of mind if they are shot by anything.

All I say is make YOUR choice, but understand what CAN happen if you discharge any firearm in your house. As I guy that has experimented with this, if you have the ability see what your choice in firearms does to a hollow core door, to a triple pain window, to sheetrock.

Your choice, and you will have to live with it.

Warp

August 28, 2013, 10:11 AM

I do not agree....but it is a decision that each person that makes the choice to have a firearm in the home has to make.

What do you not agree with?

Why?

My point is you don't need large powerful weapons to stop 90% of what happens when the bad guy enters your home.

A carbine in 5.56 isn't considered large or powerful by very many people. It's a carbine chambered in an intermediate rifle cartridge.

So many internet experts think you need high powered rifles, large pistols, whatever.

Who considers 5.56/.223 to be a "high powered rifle"? :confused:

The real truth is the best for home defense is a shot gun bottom line.

That is not a fact and is not the bottom line truth.

There are certainly benefits to a shotgun. There are also drawbacks.

It may be what you decide on, it may be best for you, but it absolutely is not the "bottom line" best for everybody. NOTHING is the bottom line best, for everybody.

All I say is make YOUR choice, but understand what CAN happen if you discharge any firearm in your house.

Of course.

And that includes shotguns.

You are always responsible for the projectiles you send downrange.

JShirley

August 28, 2013, 10:18 AM

Yes.

And my choices are based on my experiences and knowledge, including observing the effects of shot and bullets on game ranging from 1 to 220 lbs. There really is nothing else like seeing what happens to living tissue when shot.

fpgt72

August 28, 2013, 01:15 PM

Yes.

And my choices are based on my experiences and knowledge, including observing the effects of shot and bullets on game ranging from 1 to 220 lbs. There really is nothing else like seeing what happens to living tissue when shot.
And mine are including observing the effects of shot and bullets on HUMANS ranging from 100-200lbs. A person will react in very different ways over a "game" animal.

fpgt72

August 28, 2013, 01:18 PM

What do you not agree with?

Why?

A carbine in 5.56 isn't considered large or powerful by very many people. It's a carbine chambered in an intermediate rifle cartridge.

Who considers 5.56/.223 to be a "high powered rifle"? :confused:

That is not a fact and is not the bottom line truth.

There are certainly benefits to a shotgun. There are also drawbacks.

It may be what you decide on, it may be best for you, but it absolutely is not the "bottom line" best for everybody. NOTHING is the bottom line best, for everybody.

Of course.

And that includes shotguns.

You are always responsible for the projectiles you send downrange.
Your questions are too cumbersome for a computer idiot like myself to answer....but I think that just about everyone thinks the 5.56 is a high powered rifle round....including the army.

And why do you think you see AR type rifles in so many patrol cars anymore....we learned from the LA bank shooting that your normal 9mm or 45 will not have the power to take down a person wearing the type of protection the people used in that crime.

Walkalong

August 28, 2013, 01:34 PM

If anyone breaks into your home wearing that kind of gear and armed as they were, you have much bigger problems than which caliber you need.

That situation was far, far, from the average self defense situation.

But that really wasn't the nature of the OP's question IMO. We are talking about the common self defense situation a civilian might find themselves in, not what round is adequate for police and military personal for the worst of situations.

I know of no one who thinks the .223 is a high powered round by the way, and the army certainly knows better, or it wouldn't have .308 and .50 BMG weapons.

C0untZer0

August 28, 2013, 01:36 PM

So do you think, the +P+ 147 grain Underwood will shed it's jacked from a 16" carbine? add about 200 FPS more then their longest pistol barrel advertises.

I think it will. It is already so close to coming apart just out of a Glock 19 barrel.

I also think the petals would sheer with just a little bit more velocity...

But my point is that the Underwood shows where the envelope is and a std pressure 147gr Gold Dot that gets a little extra velocity from a carbine barrel is not going to break the envelope.

I can see that a rifle round is better against body armor. Not sure how many burglars would have body armor.

Warp

August 28, 2013, 01:52 PM

Your questions are too cumbersome for a computer idiot like myself to answer....but I think that just about everyone thinks the 5.56 is a high powered rifle round....including the army.

No, not really.

Especially not if they know anything.

So, these people who think that the 5.56 is a high powered rifle round. What do they consider 7.62x51 or .30-06? What do they consider .338? .50 BMG?

5.56 is an intermediate cartridge. It is not a "high powered rifle round".

Not that the semantics of what it's called is truly relevant to the topic at hand...

Shawn Dodson

August 28, 2013, 03:25 PM

With the exception of a Seecamp .32 ACP all my carry guns are chambered for 9mm. (I also reload 9mm.)

The great ammo shortage of 2013 has made me realize that when TSHTF that the only ammo I'm going to have is what I already have. Ammo availability will be quickly depleted by panic buying and hoarding.

I'm considering adding a 9mm Beretta CX4 carbine to my defense gun collection - simply because I can load it with the same ammo I use in my 9mm pistols (Gold Dot 124gr +P). It'll provide a contingency in times when ammo is scarce. It'll allow me to shoot into cars, if need be, because the ammo is barrier-blind (more so than many 5.56/.223 loads). It'll also allow me the ability to take the fight down the block should the situation require.

2zulu1

August 28, 2013, 04:27 PM

Know your facts, but I know of just one real life experience that changed my mind...and all it takes is one. First you have to understand we are not only talking sheetrock, but hollow core doors (very thin) as well as glass.

The neighbor, and yes it really was a neighbor. Had one of those gun cleaning accidents. AR (a real 1990's vintage colt BTW) went off, went through his kids door, took the top round ball off his kids crib, (split the wood) and went out the window to god knows where. He sold me the rifle. He is what I would call a good guy he just got careless, and all it take is one careless moment. That proved to me that any....ANY bullet has a chance to go where you might not want it to go. Now I know that is the last thought in your head if Mr. Bad Guy is in your house. And in my experience (10yrs at a sheriffs office) most Mr. Bad Guys want to do their bad things when people are not at home....it is much more simple to take your stuff if you are not there.

I guess the bottom line is before I get too word-y IF that bullet does leave your house YOU are responsible for where it ends up....and if it ends up in the wrong place you will go to jail....and you might go to prison.

Just think about it....
You need to know your facts also, one anecdotal experience with the 5.56 doesn't condemn the caliber. One of the top rounds used by door entry teams is Hornady's 75gr BTHP because it doesn't over penetrate and it has a reputation for rapid incapacitation, that can't be said for the 9mm.

As JShirley and others have written, with all the published data available, there really isn't any need to rehash the basics based upon opinion and not experiential knowledge. :)

Inazone

August 28, 2013, 04:38 PM

I voted yes, although I would generally have a 9mm handgun rather than a carbine within reach in a defensive situation. The characteristics that might make .223 a better defensive round in some cases don't benefit me as much, living in a suburban residential area surrounded by other houses and with no prospective indoor shot more than about 10-15 yards. A handgun is the most practical for manuevering the narrow hallways in my house anyway, but if I was "pinned down" by an intruder, my Hi-Point 995TS would provide a stable platform for defending myself.

C0untZer0

August 28, 2013, 04:47 PM

One of the reasons I really like the advent of the pocket nines, the Kahr PM9/CM9, or the Rohrbaugh R9 means you don't need different calibers for different application.

Just hypothetically, if I were using 9mm for primary, 380 ACP for BUG, 5.56 for HD... you could look at it as 3 potential points of failure.

If 380 ACP supply dries up - I have to stop practicing with my BUG due to lack of ammo, same with 5.56.

I guess you could look at it another way - If you have a duty sized 9mm, a pocket nine and a 9mm carbine, basically using 9mm for everything. you're screwed if 9mm ammo supply dries up.

Bartholomew Roberts

August 28, 2013, 04:49 PM

As I guy that has experimented with this, if you have the ability see what your choice in firearms does to a hollow core door, to a triple pain window, to sheetrock.

How is shooting three things that I can penetrate with my fist going to tell me something about my choice of self defense ammo?

danez71

August 29, 2013, 12:25 AM

Even my simple mind can think of several obvious things.

Baiting?

Zach S

August 29, 2013, 01:57 AM

I guess you could look at it another way - If you have a duty sized 9mm, a pocket nine and a 9mm carbine, basically using 9mm for everything. you're screwed if 9mm ammo supply dries up.
On the flipside, if your three primary defense guns are one caliber, you're more likely to have ammo on hand if supply dries up.

I still have a .50 cal can of 9mm and a partial .30 cal can. It wasn't my primary defense caliber, but it was cheap.

fpgt72

August 29, 2013, 06:54 AM

If anyone breaks into your home wearing that kind of gear and armed as they were, you have much bigger problems than which caliber you need.

That situation was far, far, from the average self defense situation.

But that really wasn't the nature of the OP's question IMO. We are talking about the common self defense situation a civilian might find themselves in, not what round is adequate for police and military personal for the worst of situations.

I know of no one who thinks the .223 is a high powered round by the way, and the army certainly knows better, or it wouldn't have .308 and .50 BMG weapons.
Not the point I was making....High powered was the point.

And you all can think all you want, but I have a feeling I have seen more dead bodies with bullet holes in them than many of you....and where that bullet ended up going. Just remember your studies and all your facts if you go off in cuffs because that bullet went somewhere you did not intend for it to go.

And I can also see I am not going to change your mind and you and not going to erase my memory so I think it is best that I am done here before someone locks the thread.

JShirley

August 29, 2013, 07:38 AM

Okay, if scientific, repeatable tests show bullet a (in this case, carbine) penetrates less than bullet b (handgun), it is foolish to claim some other result is what's likely to happen.

Put another way, it makes no sense to expect less penetration from cartridges that have consistently demonstrated more. And, yes, color us crazy that we would believe fact (you might want to look that word up) over the opinion of some random person on the internet.

I have also done my own testing, and the 5.56 carbine, with the rounds I tested, had significantly less penetration than 9x19mm. We still have the responsibility to know our target and what lies beyond, but we can act to minimize additional risks.

John

jim in Anchorage

August 29, 2013, 08:07 AM

Has their been a single instance of someone, at home, shooting at a home intruder. and hitting a Innocent because of over penetration of the SD round?

2zulu1

August 29, 2013, 01:24 PM

Has their been a single instance of someone, at home, shooting at a home intruder. and hitting a Innocent because of over penetration of the SD round?
We had a case, decades ago, in which there was an accidental 9mm discharge from a mobile home, in a mobile home park, that entered an adjacent mobile home, killing a ~11 girl as she slept in her bed.

Here's a set up I did for testing a 9mm/147gr Gold Dot l-r, wood 4x4, steel washing machine lid, cow rib bone and water;

I voted no based upon JHP bullet performance at increased carbine velocities. JHP bullets are designed to expand/adequately penetrate w/i velocity window parameters. Increase the surface area of the hollow cavity and the bullet will perform at slower velocities, short barrel ammunition. Reduce the hollow cavity surface area and JHPs will expand at faster velocities, think .357SIG/.357mag.

Using Gold Dots as an example, their 124gr/147gr offerings are basically deep cavity designs. This 147gr Gold Dot was tested @1155

This 124gr Gold Dot over expanded at only 1268fps, take this bullet into the 1300s and its front will blow off like the above 147g

Here's a comparison to the 125gr shallow cavity design loaded to 1289fps in 9mm.

The 1289fps appears to be at the lower end of the 125gr velocity window, I've taken this bullet to ~1438fps in .38 Super and it's good for ~16" penetration, much better than the ~7" penetration of the over expanded 124gr Gold Dot.

I have a CX-4 Storm in .40 and bullet performance is lacking because of their deep cavity design.

There are simply better carbine choices for home defense than pistol calibers, especially so given that one uses a pistol to get to a shot gun or rifle caliber.

Believe it or not some people shoot FMJ ammo. I don't shoot HP ammo in a 9mm pistol. My 22 wmr rifle rivals the 9mm from a 4" barrel in energy on the target. I don't believe a hollow point will deliver adequate penetration. When you get into magnum calibers they are easily loaded with JSP ammo.

Warp

August 29, 2013, 06:13 PM

Believe it or not some people shoot FMJ ammo. I don't shoot HP ammo in a 9mm pistol. My 22 wmr rifle rivals the 9mm from a 4" barrel in energy on the target. I don't believe a hollow point will deliver adequate penetration. When you get into magnum calibers they are easily loaded with JSP ammo.

How did you come to this conclusion/belief?

A good JHP out of a 9x19 pistol is going to be a more reliable threat-stopper than FMJ.

AKElroy

August 29, 2013, 06:27 PM

How is shooting three things that I can penetrate with my fist going to tell me something about my choice of self defense ammo?

Exactly. I'm going to go out on a limb here. There is NO effective defensive ammo that will be likewise stopped by a half-inch of Sheetrock. KNOW YOUR TARGET AND WHAT IS BEYOND IT, and hit it with something effective.

AKElroy

August 29, 2013, 06:30 PM

Originally Posted by Deer_Freak
Believe it or not some people shoot FMJ ammo. I don't shoot HP ammo in a 9mm pistol. My 22 wmr rifle rivals the 9mm from a 4" barrel in energy on the target. I don't believe a hollow point will deliver adequate penetration. When you get into magnum calibers they are easily loaded with JSP ammo.

I'm with post 87. Where are you reading this? This is almost perfectly inaccurate regarding the 9mm. If you are talking .25 or .32ACP, then you have an argument for FMJ. Not due to a lack of penetration, though. The lower velocity of these mouse guns is often insufficient to allow expansion to occur. Since FMJ's offer a tad more feed reliability, I might carry them in a .32. Not in a 9mm.

Deer_Freak

August 29, 2013, 07:36 PM

Given that 9mm HP ammo usually penetrates 11" in gelatin. That doesn't include leather coats or winter clothing the 9mm HP just doesn't satisfy me. I make my own decisions when it comes to the ammo I am going to shoot. I don't let a professional ammo salesman do it for me. Especially when FMJ ammo blows right through a 24" block of gelatin. What happens if your 9mm is loaded with HP ammo and some idiot tries to run you down in a car? I want a round that will bust through the windshield and stop the driver. The FMJ will get the job done.

Warp

August 29, 2013, 07:43 PM

Given that 9mm HP ammo usually penetrates 11" in gelatin. That doesn't include leather coats or winter clothing the 9mm HP just doesn't satisfy me. I make my own decisions when it comes to the ammo I am going to shoot. I don't let a professional ammo salesman do it for me. Especially when FMJ ammo blows right through a 24" block of gelatin. What happens if you 9mm is loaded with HP ammo and some idiot tries to run you down in a car? I want a round that will bust through the windshield and stop the driver. The FMJ will get the job done.

1. Which round are you referring to that you believe penetrates 11" in gel?

2. Do you realize that heavy winter clothing is more likely to INCREASE penetration, than decrease, due to the hollow point cavity clogging? Seriously, compared to skin, tissue, bone, etc that you find in people and animals, a coat and a sweatshirt is basically nothing.

3. If you are worried about shooting somebody through an automotive windshield I would select a bonded JHP, such as a Speer Gold Dot. That said, plenty of officers have fired non bonded rounds through windshields without issue.

4. The fact that FMJ goes through 24" or more of gel is a liability to many people, because that could very easily go right through your attacker even on a perfect and careful shot, only to continue on and seriously injure or kill somebody else, when a JHP is much much less likely to do that.

You are welcome to make your own decisions, but your listed reasons don't hold up. It might be easier if you kept them to yourself, because once you start giving them out on a public forum other people are simply going to correct you, if for no other reason than to keep the fence-sitters who are listening/reading in from thinking that carrying FMJ 9mm is necessary to get sufficient penetration (it isn't necessary nor recommended)

Have a look around at the ballistics of various 9mm JHP, and then look at what police departments issue, and what kind of success they have.

Pistol caliber carbines really seem to draw a lot of flack when it comes to discussions about defensive arms. Especially those chambered in the 9x19mm Parabellum cartridge. Critics are often quick to denounce these guns as nothing more than range toys with no real capabilities as a self defense option.
This makes no sense to me. Anyone who is comfortable carrying a handgun chambered in 9x19 for SD ought to be equally comfortable using a carbine chambered in 9x19 for the same purpose, as it's only going to be more effective. Yes, over-penetration may be more common, but if one follows the four rules, penetration needn't warrant any more or less consideration regardless of the platform.

My EDC is in 9x19, and while I don't own any pistol-caliber carbine, I would be perfectly comfortable using one for HD. It may not be ideal, but I wouldn't feel limited by it.

Walkalong

August 29, 2013, 08:00 PM

I have never ever planned a defense against being run down by a car, aside from moving laterally, a feat which evidently cannot be accomplished in film.

Besides, I'll be shooting at the tires, and would still be OK with having a 9MM carbine. You cannot plan for the exact situation you will be in, because you simply have no idea, not being clairvoyant and all, and just have to have something good for most common situations.

If I was clairvoyant, and I knew I was going to be attacked by a car tomorrow, I would take my .458 Win Mag.

I have trusted my life to smaller caliber weapons with shorter barrels often, and would be comfortable using a 9MM Carbine for doing so.

AKElroy

August 29, 2013, 08:27 PM

I don't let a professional ammo salesman do it for me. Especially when FMJ ammo blows right through a 24" block of gelatin

How much energy is being transferred on a through and through? Take a peak at wound channel damage from a good HP vs. a 24" .355 hole. For that matter, compare it to JHP's from the .40 S&W, .357 sig and .45ACP. they are all virtually identical. Sure, an FMJ will likely kill or maim the assailant, but he will likely have plenty of time to do some damage while figuring out he's been shot. A good JHP is going to dump 400-500 ft lbs INTO THE TARGET, not spend it bouncing around for another half mile.

Warp

August 29, 2013, 08:30 PM

How much energy is being transferred on a through and through? Take a peak at wound channel damage from a good HP vs. a 24" .355 hole. Sure, it will likely kill or maim the assailant, but he will likely have plenty of time to do some damage while figuring out he's been shot. A good JHP is going to dump 400-500 ft lbs INTO THE TARGET, not spend it bouncing around for another half mile.

Exactly.

Which is why the .357 magnum 125gr JHP earned such a great reputation as a threat stopper, aka the magic bullet

No. If it comes to grounds for shooting, I want a better chance at stopping the aggression immediately. Particularly if the aggressor has fangs and/or claws.

2zulu1

August 29, 2013, 10:36 PM

Given that 9mm HP ammo usually penetrates 11" in gelatin. That doesn't include leather coats or winter clothing the 9mm HP just doesn't satisfy me. I make my own decisions when it comes to the ammo I am going to shoot. I don't let a professional ammo salesman do it for me. Especially when FMJ ammo blows right through a 24" block of gelatin. What happens if your 9mm is loaded with HP ammo and some idiot tries to run you down in a car? I want a round that will bust through the windshield and stop the driver. The FMJ will get the job done.
Lots of misinformation in your post, the 9mm typically provides FBI protocol penetration using service JHPs, FMJs produce minimal crush cavities compared to JHPs. Energy dump in service calibers is a myth, you should educate yourself about terminal ballistics before posting inaccurate opinions IMO. :)

Both of these books come highly recommended and should be personal libraries for those interested in this subject;

This makes no sense to me. Anyone who is comfortable carrying a handgun chambered in 9x19 for SD ought to be equally comfortable using a carbine chambered in 9x19 for the same purpose, as it's only going to be more effective. Yes, over-penetration may be more common, but if one follows the four rules, penetration needn't warrant any more or less consideration regardless of the platform.

We carry pistols because they are easy to carry, not because they are particulary effective. If I'm going to put up with carbine weight and bulk, I want a more effective cartridge, like 555 NATO or 7.62x39.

BSW

Bobson

August 30, 2013, 05:42 AM

Sure that's understandable. A 9x19 carbine isn't going to be ideal (read: best option), but its far from being good for nothing but range duty, which was what I was trying to point out.

ETA:

What's the general consensus on what a carbine actually is, anyway? Obviously an AR platform rifle could be called a carbine, depending on config. What about something like an MP5 or UMP - are those carbines? If not, what are they?

Phaedrus/69

August 30, 2013, 05:51 AM

I think the Storm would be a great defensive carbine. In fact I've been eyeballing one for a while. While I wouldn't feel undergunned with one (after all, I carry a 9mm sidearm) I agree that if you are going to have a rifle sized gun it might as well be a real rifle. Especially since you can get a good basic M4-type gun for the same price.

Still, I wouldn't turn my nose up at that little Beretta. I think you can get 20 round mags for it. That's 20 rounds on tap that can be delivered very accurately at a very high rate. I imagine I could get fifteen very solid COM hits faster with the Storm carbine than with my HK P30S.

briansmithwins

August 30, 2013, 05:55 AM

Still, I wouldn't turn my nose up at that little Beretta. I think you can get 20 round mags for it. That's 20 rounds on tap that can be delivered very accurately at a very high rate. I imagine I could get fifteen very solid COM hits faster with the Storm carbine than with my HK P30S.

You ought to be able to.

I frequently shoot our local speed steel match with my Uzi. I can turn in faster times with it than almost all the pistol shooters. Pistol shooters that clean my clock by full seconds when I'm shooting a pistol.

Any carbine gets you another more stability, less recoil, and hopefully better sights than a pistol.

My point is that if you're lugging around a carbine anyway, haul the most effective carbine you can.

BSW

Warp

August 30, 2013, 07:20 AM

Sure that's understandable. A 9x19 carbine isn't going to be ideal (read: best option), but its far from being good for nothing but range duty, which was what I was trying to point out.

ETA:

What's the general consensus on what a carbine actually is, anyway? Obviously an AR platform rifle could be called a carbine, depending on config. What about something like an MP5 or UMP - are those carbines? If not, what are they?

Carbine can mean a shorter version of a rifle.

Or it can mean a rifle with the legal minimum barrel length (16") or shorter (SBR).

Or it can be an arbitrary thing people just use, because it doesn't have a black and white universally applicable dictionary definition.

Zytel

August 30, 2013, 08:36 AM

Yes. I had one for years. I wouldn't hesitate to use it for home defense.

JShirley

August 30, 2013, 11:05 AM

Carbine can mean a short rifle, or a rifle firing a less powerful cartridge. A Lee-Enfield Jungle Carbine fires a full-power cartridge, it's just shorter than the standard SMLE. An M1 carbine, on the other hand, fires a less powerful cartridge than the US military standard rifle cartridge of the time.

CraigC

August 30, 2013, 11:39 AM

...most 9mm carbines are available in 5.56x45mm, for only a few ounces more weight, and the exact same length.
And enough concussive muzzle blast to rupture your eardrums and disorient the shooter when fired in enclosed areas. Yeah, no thanks. A 16" 9mm will not be much louder than a .22Mag rifle. If any.

The FMJ will get the job done.
Try it. Even .45 hardball is dismal on flesh and the 9mm is worse. Anybody who has used FMJ on critters knows this. The 9mm is absolutely dependent on the performance of a good JHP to be effective.

Warp

August 30, 2013, 11:43 AM

And enough concussive muzzle blast to rupture your eardrums and disorient the shooter when fired in enclosed areas. Yeah, no thanks. A 16" 9mm will not be much louder than a .22Mag rifle. If any.

What makes you say/think this?

My (limited) experience differs.

CraigC

August 30, 2013, 11:44 AM

Uh, shooting a .223 indoors???

Warp

August 30, 2013, 11:46 AM

Uh, shooting a .223 indoors???

Whose eardrums ruptured? What kind of indoors was it, what specific firearm was being fired, and where was the person with ruptured eardrums relative to the firearm?

briansmithwins

August 30, 2013, 11:51 AM

Pistols and rifles are going to damage hearing if fired without hearing protection.

Even more indoors.

But, your brains aren't going to run out your ears or your eyeballs liquefy if you shoot a rifle indoors.

BSW

CraigC

August 30, 2013, 12:06 PM

Pistols and rifles are going to damage hearing if fired without hearing protection.
That is a given and should be obvious enough that it doesn't need mentioning. However, a high pressure rifle cartridge is much louder and will be much more likely to cause immediate permanent damage and it can disorient the shooter. Yes my number one priority is to survive the fight but if I can prevent serious permanent hearing damage I certainly will. You guys can act as if I'm stupid for being concerned with such things all you want. My AR is standing in a corner four feet away but if it came to a fight inside the house, I'd rather it had a .45ACP upper on it.

You have obviously decided that pistol cartridge carbines aren't good for anything but not everybody agrees with you.

Warp

August 30, 2013, 12:08 PM

That is a given and should be obvious enough that it doesn't need mentioning. However, a high pressure rifle cartridge is much louder and will be much more likely to cause immediate permanent damage and it can disorient the shooter. Yes my number one priority is to survive the fight but if I can prevent serious permanent hearing damage I certainly will. You guys can act as if I'm stupid for being concerned with such things all you want. My AR is standing in a corner four feet away but if it came to a fight inside the house, I'd rather it had a .45ACP upper on it.

You have obviously decided that pistol cartridge carbines aren't good for anything but not everybody agrees with you.

What is the basis for your claim that a rifle in 5.56 would rupture eardrums if fired indoors?

Nobody is acting like you are stupid for being concerned with hearing damage...but what is the basis for your claim that a rifle in 5.56 would rupture eardrums if fired indoors?

Walkalong

August 30, 2013, 05:50 PM

I have no clue if a .223 in a hallway inside would rupture an eardrum. I figure it probably won't, but I know for certain it will be painful.

I have posted numerous times that I would much rather shoot a larger bore "boomer" than a caliber with that has a high pitched "crack" to it.

You could not pay me to shoot a full pressure .32-20 round in a handgun or a .327 Federal indoors without hearing protection, but for the right money I might do it with a .45 ACP. I know exactly what that will do. The .32-20 without hearing protection is bad enough out in the open. I know exactly what that will do as well. I also know which one I would be better suited to remain in focus afterwards.

The discussion of what it will do to your hearing and focus is relevant when discussing self defense in general, but has nothing to do with this question, as it pertains to a 9MM carbine and nothing else.

The question is would you be comfortable using a 9MM carbine for self defense, not is the .223 better.

Yes, or no, I prefer something different, I think it is underpowered, or not dependable enough.

JShirley

August 30, 2013, 05:52 PM

And enough concussive muzzle blast to rupture your eardrums and disorient the shooter when fired in enclosed areas. Yeah, no thanks.

I fired a .270 inside, 25 years ago. No eardrums were ruptured. Also, other than the Oh, crap, I just shot the ceiling feeling, no actual disorientation happened, either. :rolleyes:

I believe in wearing ear pro when shooting. Anything. But your statements regarding the sound and pressure effects of firing .223 inside are not consistent with my experiences.

John

Warp

August 30, 2013, 08:17 PM

I have stood next to a guy at an indoor range, in a very small area, completely surrounded by concrete (walls and floor anyway), who wore no hearing protection while somebody not more than maybe 8 feet away from us blasted away with his AR chambered in 5.56. His eardrums didn't rupture or anything of the sort.

All that happened was we looked at him like he was a dumbass, and he probably did some damage to his hearing that day, trying to be Mr Tough Guy.

I have also spoke with people who were right by 5.56 fired indoors in real use, and no eardrums were even close to being ruptured.

Cooldill

August 30, 2013, 08:33 PM

One could make the argument that if one had to fire on more than one threat indoors, transitioning would be easier with the 9mm carbine due to the decreased noise and muzzle blast vs. a 5.56 carbine. It's a valid point.

We all know the AR-15 is the only weapon at the gun shop actually worth defending yourself with (sarcasm :rolleyes:) so thanks everyone for not cutting this idea to pieces right off the bat. I think we all learned something about the general consensus regarding pistol caliber carbines as a defensive option. As for me, when I get my Beretta I won't have any reservations about keeping it loaded with a 30 round mag of +P JHPs, ya know... just in case.

CraigC

August 30, 2013, 09:11 PM

That settles it then, there is absolutely no difference between shooting a 9mm carbine and a .223 indoors. Because no one ever wrote a book describing how SPL's above 140db can rupture ear drums or cause vertigo or balance issues. Or 100db if only one ear is exposed. Because one time, at band camp, Warp did it and didn't bleed from his ears it's impossible for anyone under any conditions. Yep, uh huh. :rolleyes:

They work, sorry.

Warp

August 30, 2013, 09:14 PM

That settles it then, there is absolutely no difference between shooting a 9mm carbine and a .223 indoors. Because no one ever wrote a book describing how SPL's above 140db can rupture ear drums or cause vertigo or balance issues. Or 100db if only one ear is exposed. Because one time, at band camp, Warp did it and didn't bleed from his ears it's impossible for anyone under any conditions. Yep, uh huh. :rolleyes:

They work, sorry.

I asked you twice, above, what you based your statement/opinion about ruptured eardrums on, and your response was "Uh, shooting a .223 indoors???"

MODS: I realize this is more off topic. Would it be too troublesome to split these posts off into their own thread?

Cooldill

August 30, 2013, 09:20 PM

I don't think that would be necessary Warp. It's just discussing one aspect of using a 9mm carbine vs. a .223/5.56 carbine. I think we can all agree guns are loud, and even louder indoors.

ugaarguy

August 30, 2013, 09:22 PM

And enough concussive muzzle blast to rupture your eardrums and disorient the shooter when fired in enclosed areas. Yeah, no thanks. A 16" 9mm will not be much louder than a .22Mag rifle. If any.
NO. Perhaps you'd like to read some scientific data -http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml.

Because no one ever wrote a book describing how SPL's above 140db can rupture ear drums or cause vertigo or balance issues. Or 100db if only one ear is exposed.
Check the link above. None of the pistols, rifles, or shotguns tested produced less than 150dB. If you have data from a reputable source showing that commercial 9mm loads out of a 16" bbl produce less than 140dB I'd love to see it.

Cooldill

August 30, 2013, 09:46 PM

I think what he was trying to say is 9mm seems to be pretty quite when fired out of a rifle length barrel, perhaps even quieter than .223 or 5.56mm.

While trying to point out any flaws to the .223/5.56 AR system in regards to home defense is sacrilege I know (JK! :p) perhaps this is one advantage the less powerful rifle has to the hammer of Thor known as the AR-15.

AKElroy

August 30, 2013, 09:48 PM

On the off hand, 1 in a million chance I am forced to use deadly force with a rifle in my home, I don't think I am going to give one seconds thought to my hearing.

Cooldill

August 30, 2013, 09:57 PM

Well good for you, I hope you never need to either. I haven't any reservations in entertaining the thought that a 9mm carbine would still be superior in target transition in low light and a confined space after firing on the first target, with my ears being no worse the wear and hopefully better than if I fired an AR.

Warp

August 30, 2013, 10:02 PM

Well good for you, I hope you never need to either. I haven't any reservations in entertaining the thought that a 9mm carbine would still be superior in target transition in low light and a confined space after firing on the first target, with my ears being no worse the wear and hopefully better than if I fired an AR.

That's all fine and dandy. Except for the "no worse the wear" part. It's still an unmuffled gunshot right by your head in a small enclosed space with no hearing protection.

Really, the issue was claiming eardrum rupture if you went with an intermediate rifle cartridge instead.

AKElroy

August 30, 2013, 10:06 PM

My point is that hearing is not a consideration for me, only the effectiveness of the tool. If a .223 is superior for HD, then that's the choice. Both are going to be damn loud in my bedroom, I might as well go with the best tool for the job.

Cooldill

August 30, 2013, 10:12 PM

I humbly respect your opinion. However, for me, 9mm is the way to go. It is superior to any .223 or 5.56mm carbine for what I'm looking for. Because what I'm looking for is not a 100% dedicated home defense tool, it is a rifle that is both economic but will serve very well in many different defensive scenarios. Will it be better than your AR-15? Probably not, especially according to you, but it works. For me.

Warp

August 30, 2013, 10:15 PM

I humbly respect your opinion. However, for me, 9mm is the way to go. It is superior to any .223 or 5.56mm carbine for what I'm looking for. Because what I'm looking for is not a 100% dedicated home defense tool, it is a rifle that is both economic but will serve very well in many different defensive scenarios. Will it be better than your AR-15? Probably not, especially according to you, but it works. For me.

Tell us more.

In what other defensive scenarios is the 9mm superior, and how/why?

Also, which specific firearm are you referring to?

AKElroy

August 30, 2013, 10:23 PM

I humbly respect your opinion. However, for me, 9mm is the way to go. It is superior to any .223 or 5.56mm carbine for what I'm looking for. Because what I'm looking for is not a 100% dedicated home defense tool, it is a rifle that is both economic but will serve very well in many different defensive scenarios. Will it be better than your AR-15? Probably not, especially according to you, but it works. For me.
I don't own an AR15, I was just making a point that hearing is not my primary, or even my last, consideration for HD. I have a 9mm P226 on the nightstand, and a .30-30 trapper in the corner.

Oxidation

August 31, 2013, 04:11 AM

I would have no issue protecting my family with a 9mm carbine. Would have to have a nice Eotech or Akog on it for good night time target acquisition.

JShirley

August 31, 2013, 11:16 AM

At close range, an Aimpoint would be a much better choice than an ACOG.

Cooldill

August 31, 2013, 11:16 AM

Tell us more.

In what other defensive scenarios is the 9mm superior, and how/why?

Also, which specific firearm are you referring to?

If you reread my post you will find the answer to your question. I am referring to the Beretta CX4 Storm, and I did not claim 9mm to be superior to anything in a defensive scenario. I said it works for me for home defense because I plan on using it mostly as a fun gun that is more affordable to shoot than an AR but with proper ammunition should do fine for defensive use.

AKELroy, a .30-30 lever gun whould be great for home defense provided you don't live where possible over penetration would be a problem. I can see using a lighter nice expanding hunting bullet.

JShirley

August 31, 2013, 11:54 AM

One of the expanding bullets suitable for .30 Carbine would probably be a good choice to load in the .30-30. The .30-30 Silvertip HP has 17.7" of gelatin penetration. (Interesting to note on the same page that .30-06 150 grain SP has 3cm less penetration-IOW, exactly the penetration many experts suggest as ideal.)
John

kgpcr

August 31, 2013, 04:19 PM

There are a lot better choices out there!

Bohemus

August 31, 2013, 06:55 PM

9mm or any other pistol caliber carbine has one enormous PRO - with linear compensator (or anything that directs muzzle flash forwards) its possible to use it without ear protection for some time. Its better than 9mm pistol. With .223 you are deaf instantly.
With American 16" barrel rule, 9mm is as silent as .22lr.

JShirley

August 31, 2013, 08:02 PM

You haven't read...well, really any of the other posts.

With .223 you are deaf instantly.
No, you're not. :rolleyes: We would have many thousands of young, deaf vets if that was true.

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm Carbine for defense?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!